Grim is the Word

The Los Angeles Times reports that the six redacted names in the infamous Jason Grimsley affidavit are:

Roger Clemens

Andy Pettitte

Miguel Tejada

Brian Roberts

Jay Gibbons

David Segui

Say it ain’t so, Jay. Say it ain’t so. Seriously, this is further proof that this scandal isn’t just going to disappear. The players on this list (especially you know who) are significant. And again, we should all presume innocence before guilt because that is the noble way of this country.

the rumors about tegada and clemens have been around for a while, but andy pettitte? i’m really bummed. i hope it’s not true. he was my favorite pitcher on the yanks. and i always watch his astros game.

AnonymousOctober 1, 2006, 2:11 am

In the words of napoleon…. Yeeeeesssss.

AnonymousOctober 1, 2006, 2:18 am

Wow, Pettitte? Wouldn’t this be counter to his hyper-religiosity, this cheating?

SFOctober 1, 2006, 8:17 am

Sordid.

YFOctober 1, 2006, 10:13 am

Grimsley’s motives can certainly be questioned: is he turning names over in return for leniency? What is his credibility, at this point?
I’d be inclined to say I am shocked to hear Pettitte’s name in there, but at this point I don’t think I could be shocked by anyone’s name coming up, such are the depths of this problem.

SFOctober 1, 2006, 10:15 am

If Clemens comes up then it can’t be a surprise that Pettitte come up to; Pettitte modeled his training regimen on that of Clemens. The connector appears to be Clemens’s strength coach, who came to the Yankees with Clemens from Toronto, and then devoted himself solely to Clemens.
I don’t reallt know what can come of this. There are no dirty tests, and these guys are going to deny using. So what’s the evidence? Jayson Grimsley says they may have used? When? How much? The case is hopelessly circumstantial. Baseball blew this 10 years ago. There’s no way to go back in time now.

YFOctober 1, 2006, 10:30 am

sordid indeed. Is it possible that the reason Clemens came back so late in the season was that he was serving a 50 game suspension? That’s a crazy theory that I’ve read on some blogs. Seems unlikely, but such is the nature of this problem. You can only speculate (and who knows? You might be correct).
SF, I’m with you, I wouldn’t be surprised by any name that came up now. The positive tests, the implicated names, show that this scandal that includes all types of players (good, bad, young, old, big and small).

Nick-YFOctober 1, 2006, 10:56 am

Nick,
Interesting, but why do you think MLB would keep a Clemens suspension under wraps?

MLB would keep the Clemens suspension under wraps because he’s one of the best players of our era. He sells tickets and is one of the faces of the league. That’s the cynical reason. I’m not sure I buy it, but I would’t put it past the powers that be.

Nick-YFOctober 1, 2006, 11:33 am

I thought the same thing, but it seems like the risks outweigh the rewards: if that becomes public, then Congress is sure to get involved in the steroids issue – something that MLB definitely wants to avoid.

They reported on ESPN that Grimsley was tuned in to the stuff from one of the Yanks former conditioning coaches/trainers.
YF you are right, this was blown 10 years ago and they are screaming about it now. This is not solving anything. This witch hunt seems to be similar to something that happened in a town named Salem.

This is not solving anything. This witch hunt seems to be similar to something that happened in a town named Salem
I totally disagree. Grimsley may have been involved in criminal activity. If there is continuing activity, then it needs to be rooted out. If some players get caught in the crossfire, so be it. Baseball is doing a better job of policing the game, but they certainly aren’t doing a perfect job. The truth outing may hurt, but if it helps the long-term health of the game, then I am all for it, my naivete be damned.
I see no reason to bury my head in the sand, even if it means some of my heroes have to suffer. I’ll suffer along with them ungladly (or at least my sense of nostalgia will) if in the end it means baseball will eventually be cleaner.
At some point it’s not enough to just say “move on, this is old news”. Though there may be no way to prove what happened with Clemens, Pettitte, it’s just not right to say “nothing here, time to look forward”. That’s way too easy. I’d rather people, whether it’s the authorities, journalists, or some other more formal body (not the GOP-led congress, though), keep digging. I am all for knowing more names, even if means I will have to give up my heroes. I, personally, want some truth.

SFOctober 1, 2006, 12:19 pm

SF – i agree. it hurts to know that pettitte (one of my favorite pitchers) may be involved, but i want truth. if it can lead to stronger testing and a cleaning up of the game, then I’m all for learning about who was involved.

m.g. yanks fanOctober 1, 2006, 12:39 pm

There are 2 issues there: stopping cheating now (and we can all agree, I’m sure, that MLB/MLBPA’s current system, while an improvement, blows) and figuring out who cheated in the past. To the extent that players find themselves faced with legal problems, hey, that’s their problem. But I fail to see how a broader “truth commission” is going to be operable, unless players and owners agree on some basic ground rules. And even then, evidence against individuals is going to be highly circumstantial until you get players testifying against each other. Unless there’s some kind of blanket amnesty, I don’t see how this resolves itself.

YFOctober 1, 2006, 12:41 pm

“But I fail to see how a broader “truth commission” is going to be operable, unless players and owners agree on some basic ground rules”
I can’t see that happening – in which case the “truth commission” will undoubtedly be a gaggle of grandstanding congressmen. Living with status quo is a more appealing option, in my book.

“But I fail to see how a broader “truth commission” is going to be operable, unless players and owners agree on some basic ground rules. And even then, evidence against individuals is going to be highly circumstantial until you get players testifying against each other. Unless there’s some kind of blanket amnesty, I don’t see how this resolves itself’
This is what I mean by it solves nothing. The only issue that has come to light is a couple of players have made allegations against players or former players. The items that have been displayed to the public are questionable and drags players through he mud and nothing definitive (a shipping invoice, credit card statement) is shown. Grimsley stated that Clemens and Pettite used perfomance enhancing drugs and Tejada used steroids. What PED is he talking about? Creatine, Mega Mass 9000?
I do not think that we should bury our head in sand or that we should overlook this, but if you are going to release information, give some meat in the sandwich. This way people are not getting cooked in the media.

SF…I agree that the game needs to be cleaned up and some people are going to get caught in the crossfire. It would pain me also if some of the Sox got caught up in it. I just think in fairness that maybe there should be something that says when it is okay to release the information and the type. Allegations from a crook (Grimsley) seem to have a motive behind them.

“Truth Commissions” are not the answer, I agree with YF. But information that comes out in the course of a criminal investigation by the authorities doesn’t seem to qualify as that coming from a witch hunt, either. I think it is important to recognize how this information has come out, who it is from, assess the credibility, be realistically skeptical, and move forward, even if that involves pain. Ignoring stuff like this is not the answer, we can’t reject it just because we don’t like the information.

Grimsley also has said that the affidavit contains names that were merely an FBI agent’s recollection — not necessarily a written-down, recorded statement paraphrased into an affidavit (as is usually the case)/
As to Grimsley’s credibility, there is some question about that. Not only do you have to question the credibility of someone willing to cheat at his profession, but he also went back on his word to federal investigators about cooperating with them, which led to the very public investigation of him and the filing of the redacted affidavit. Now that he’s abcking away from the information he is said to have given when he was cooperating, it just makes it ugly. I think looking at it overall, you have to trust the affidavit more than Grimsley’s denial that he said the names contained in it — because there’s more gain for him to tell the government the truth (leniency) and deny doing it in public (saving face).

Paul SFOctober 1, 2006, 2:25 pm

…i don’t think i buy the theory that mlb kept a clemens suspension under wraps because he is one of baseball’s best players of this era…first of all, it’s impossible to keep such a huge secret…there are whistle-blowers in every nook and cranny of our society, just waiting to “out” somebody for something…even the fbi and cia can’t keep a secrect….second, barry bonds is also one of the best players of this era [notice i didn’t say best-liked], so why make him such a poster-child and give rog a pass…
…sf, i couldn’t agree with you more, even if some of our current heroes from our respective teams were to wind up undeniably implicated in this mess, then let it be…i would advocate some lifetime suspensions, in order to send a real message that the rules that make our game great will not be trifled with….paul sf, you make a good point too, that grimsley’s gut-spilling is self-serving at best…
…folks, this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg…tighten your seat belts and your chin straps my friends, this is only going to get worse, and uglier….

dcOctober 1, 2006, 4:56 pm

What the hell does this mean?
In any case, I agree with SF. Paraphrasing L.A. Confidential:
The Press: “The home run chase made you. Do you want to tear all that down?”
The Fan: “With a wrecking ball. You want to help me swing it?”
Full disclosure is the best hope for redemption.

attackgerbilOctober 2, 2006, 8:27 pm

Now the laywers and the agent are citing a number of “errors” in what Grimsley supposedly said and what they released to the public.